Currently the most widely practiced industrial scale production method for hydrogen peroxide is an indirect reaction of hydrogen and oxygen employing alkylanthraquinone as the working material. In a first catalytic hydrogenation step, the alkylanthraquinone, dissolved in a working solution comprising organic solvents (e.g. di-isobutylcarbinol and methyl naphthalene), is converted to alkylanthrahydroquinone. In a separate autooxidation step, this reduced compound is oxidized to regenerate the alkylanthraquinone and yield hydrogen peroxide. Subsequent separation by aqueous extraction, refining, and concentration operations are then employed to give a merchant grade product.
Overall, this indirect route to H2O2 formation, whereby a carrier medium is reduced and then oxidized, adds complexity and requires high installation and operating costs. One notable drawback is the significant solubility of the alkylanthraquinone in the aqueous extraction medium used to separate the hydrogen peroxide product. This promotes loss of working solution and leads to contamination of the hydrogen peroxide product with organic species that, when the hydrogen peroxide is concentrated to levels suitable for transport, are reactive with it. A second problem relates to the solubility of the aqueous extraction solution in the alkylanthraquinone working solution. When wet working solution is separated from the aqueous phase for recycle to the indirect oxidation stage, residual aqueous phase “pockets” within the organic solution provide regions for hydrogen peroxide product to concentrate to the extent of becoming hazardous. A third problem relates to the usage and recovery of an organic compound when small amounts of hydrogen peroxide are needed without the organic contamination in an aqueous stream.
Considerably more simple and economical than the alkylanthraquinone route is the direct synthesis of hydrogen peroxide from gaseous hydrogen and oxygen feed streams. This process is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,832,938 B1 and other references, but attempts at commercialization have led to industrial accidents resulting from the inherent explosion hazards of this process. Namely, explosive concentrations of hydrogen in an oxygen-hydrogen gaseous mixture at normal temperature and pressure are from 4.7-93.9% by volume. Thus the range is extremely broad.
It is also known that dilution of the gaseous mixture with an inert gas like nitrogen scarcely changes the lower limit concentrations, on an inert gas-free basis, of the two gases. Within normal ranges of pressure variation (1-200 atmospheres) and temperature variation (0-100° C.) the explosive range is known to undergo little change. Furthermore, even when these reactants are brought together in a ratio that, in the homogeneous condition, would be outside the flammability envelope, the establishment of homogeneity from pure components necessarily involves at least a temporary passage through the flammability envelope. For these reasons, the explosion risks associated with the direct contacting of hydrogen and oxygen are not easily mitigated.
In the area of directly contacting hydrogen and oxygen, some efforts have also been made to contain the reaction in a liquid phase. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,925,588 B1 discloses the use of a catalyst having a modified hydrophobic/hydrophilic support to provide optimum performance in an aqueous liquid phase. Also, U.S. Pat. No. 6,042,804 B1 discloses dispersing minute bubbles of hydrogen and oxygen into a rapidly flowing acidic aqueous liquid medium containing a catalyst. Unfortunately, however, the hydrogen and oxygen reactants are only slightly soluble in the aqueous reaction solvents disclosed in these references.
Other references, namely U.S. Pat. No. 4,336,240 B1 and U.S. Pat. No. 4,347,231 B1 disclose two-phase reaction systems with a homogeneous catalyst dissolved in an organic phase. As mentioned in the former of these two references, homogeneous catalyst systems in general suffer from drawbacks that are a deterrent to their commercial use. The adverse characteristics include poor catalyst stability under reaction conditions, limited catalyst solubility in the reaction medium, and low reaction rates for the production of hydrogen peroxide. In addition, a gaseous H2/O2 containing environment above the two-phase liquid reaction system maintains the equilibrium concentrations of these reactants dissolved in the liquid phase. Therefore, this gaseous atmosphere above the reaction liquid must necessarily be outside the flammability envelope, thus greatly restricting the range of potential reactant mole ratios in the liquid phase.
There are two types of reactors for making hydrogen peroxide in water. The first is a slurry reactor in which the gas bubbles and catalyst are dispersed in a flowing liquid phase. While this is advantageous for mixing and provides good heat and mass transfer, this method requires a large amount of expensive catalyst, in addition to catalyst recovery and recycle methods. The second reactor is a trickle bed reactor in which the gas and liquid flow over a packed bed of catalyst. The main drawback to the trickle bed reactor is the gas is a continuous phase and therefore requires a small channel size, and hence small particle size to prevent the hydrogen and oxygen from entering a dangerous regime.
It would be useful to have a device and process for making hydrogen peroxide large quantities, on an as-needed basis, without the need of extra chemicals for an environmental safer method, and without generating a waste product stream.